Economy Trump Day 1 Executive Order: 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada with additional 10% on China

Investors say Trump's universal tariff is the greatest potential risk to the U.S. economy in 2025​

A 10% to 20% tariff on imports from all countries is expected to raise inflation​

By
Rocio Fabbro

President-elect Donald Trump has made sweeping tariffs a key policy for his upcoming administration, promising day one taxes on all imports from around the world. This could pose a threat to U.S. economic performance.

Investors believe a potential universal tariff is “the greatest potential risk for the US economy and US markets in 2025,” according to a Goldman Sachs (GS) survey of over 500 market participants. In its outlook published last month, Goldman researchers cited a 10% universal tariff as one of the biggest risks to the economy.

Trump has said his universal tariff could reach up to 20%, as well as a 60% to 100% tariff targeting goods from China. Last week, Trump also vowed to slap Mexico and Canada — America’s two largest trade partners — with 25% tariffs on the first day of his new administration. The promised swath of tariffs could put upward pressure on a number of consumer goods.

On average, investors polled by Goldman who expect a universal tariff between 10% and 20% also expect higher inflation on average in 2025. More than half of investors who forecast a universal tariff also expect core Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) inflation of 2.6% or higher, compared to just 35% of investors who are expecting more limited tariffs.

Goldman believes that a sweeping tariff would temporarily raise inflation to around 3% at its peak, and could shave as much as 0.75-1.25 percentage points of off GDP growth, depending on whether it is offset by other tax cuts.

Core PCE, which excludes the prices of food and energy, rose 2.8% on an annual basis in October, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported last week, a slight uptick from 2.7% in the prior month.

Any negative effects of tariffs will have “only a moderate and one-time effect,” Goldman said, which would come on top of already downwardly trending consumer prices.

Meanwhile, Goldman estimates that Trump’s proposal to impose tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports would generate slightly less than $300 billion in revenue and boost the effective tariff rate by 8.6%, which would raise PCE by 0.9%.

https://qz.com/trump-universal-tariff-us-economy-risk-investor-goldman-1851711191
 
ColemanwastheGOAT said:
When was Trump's first day? I must have missed it.

Do you guys ever get tired of saying 'oh ho ho ho just wait' and then the thing never happens?

He's not going to put a 25% tarriff on imports. He's signaling to his neighbour's to get their act together.

Like when you were a kid and your dad said 'quiet down or I'm gonna turn this car around.'
Click to expand...
Yeah you’re right we should never believe anything that comes out of his mouth directly, good point , I 100 agree.
 
LeonardoBjj said:

Investors say Trump's universal tariff is the greatest potential risk to the U.S. economy in 2025​

A 10% to 20% tariff on imports from all countries is expected to raise inflation​

By
Rocio Fabbro

President-elect Donald Trump has made sweeping tariffs a key policy for his upcoming administration, promising day one taxes on all imports from around the world. This could pose a threat to U.S. economic performance.

Investors believe a potential universal tariff is “the greatest potential risk for the US economy and US markets in 2025,” according to a Goldman Sachs (GS) survey of over 500 market participants. In its outlook published last month, Goldman researchers cited a 10% universal tariff as one of the biggest risks to the economy.

Trump has said his universal tariff could reach up to 20%, as well as a 60% to 100% tariff targeting goods from China. Last week, Trump also vowed to slap Mexico and Canada — America’s two largest trade partners — with 25% tariffs on the first day of his new administration. The promised swath of tariffs could put upward pressure on a number of consumer goods.

On average, investors polled by Goldman who expect a universal tariff between 10% and 20% also expect higher inflation on average in 2025. More than half of investors who forecast a universal tariff also expect core Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) inflation of 2.6% or higher, compared to just 35% of investors who are expecting more limited tariffs.

Goldman believes that a sweeping tariff would temporarily raise inflation to around 3% at its peak, and could shave as much as 0.75-1.25 percentage points of off GDP growth, depending on whether it is offset by other tax cuts.

Core PCE, which excludes the prices of food and energy, rose 2.8% on an annual basis in October, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported last week, a slight uptick from 2.7% in the prior month.

Any negative effects of tariffs will have “only a moderate and one-time effect,” Goldman said, which would come on top of already downwardly trending consumer prices.

Meanwhile, Goldman estimates that Trump’s proposal to impose tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports would generate slightly less than $300 billion in revenue and boost the effective tariff rate by 8.6%, which would raise PCE by 0.9%.

https://qz.com/trump-universal-tariff-us-economy-risk-investor-goldman-1851711191
Click to expand...
this is dumb/dumpster fire

the tarriffs are already working, trudeau went to Mar a lago
mexilady already in talks

that's the whole point of leverage, the number hasnt landed.
 

China’s ban on key high-tech materials could have broad impact on industries, economy​


BY ELAINE KURTENBACH​

Updated 5:23 AM BRT, December 6, 2024

BANGKOK (AP) — China has banned exports of key materials used to make a wide range of products, including smartphones, electric vehicles, radar systems and CT scanners, swiping back at Washington after it expanded export controls to include dozens of Chinese companies that make equipment used to produce advanced computer chips.

Both sides say their controls are justified by national security concerns and both accuse the other of “weaponizing” trade. Analysts say the latest restrictions could have a wide impact on manufacturing in many industries and supply chains.

“Critical mineral security is now intrinsically linked to the escalating tech trade war,” Gracelin Baskaran and Meredith Schwartz of the Center for Strategic International Studies, wrote in a report on Beijing’s decision.

The full impact will depend partly on whether U.S. industries can compensate for any loss of access to the strategically important materials, equipment and components.

Here’s why this could be a tipping point in trade conflict between the two biggest economies, coming at a time when antagonisms already were expected to heat up once President-elect Donald Trump takes office, given his vows to hike tariffs on imports of Chinese-made products.

WHAT DID CHINA DO AND WHY?​

China has banned, in principle, exports to the United States of gallium, germanium and antimony — critical minerals needed to make advanced semiconductors, among many other types of equipment. Beijing also tightened controls on exports of graphite, which is used in EV and grid-storage batteries. China is the largest source for most of these materials and also dominates refining of those materials, which are used both for consumer goods and for military purposes.

The limits announced Tuesday also include exports of super-hard materials, such as diamonds and other synthetic materials that are not compressible and extremely dense. They are used in many industrial areas such as cutting tools, disc brakes and protective coatings.

Next on the list of potential bans, experts say: tungsten, magnesium and aluminum alloys.

WHAT DID THE US DO AND WHY?​

The Chinese Commerce Ministry announced its measures after the U.S. government ordered a slew of new measures meant to prevent sales to China of certain types of advanced semiconductors and the tools and software needed to make them. Washington also expanded its “entity list” of companies facing strict export controls to include 140 more companies, nearly all of them based in China or Chinese-owned.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said the revised rules were intended to impair China’s ability to use advanced technologies that “pose a risk to our national security.” The updated regulations also limit exports to China of high-bandwidth memory chips that are needed to process massive amounts of data in advanced applications such as artificial intelligence.

Export licenses will likely be denied for any U.S. company trying to do business with the 140 companies newly added to the “entity list,” as well as the dozens of others already on the list. The aim, officials said, is to stop Chinese companies from leveraging U.S. technology to make their own semiconductors.

The Biden administration has been expanding the number of companies affected by such export controls while encouraging an expansion of investments in and manufacturing of semiconductors in the U.S. and other Western countries.

Washington also extended the restrictions on exports of advanced semiconductor technology to companies in other countries, though it excluded companies in key allies like Japan, South Korea and the Netherlands that are thought to have adequate export controls of their own.

HOW IMPORTANT ARE THOSE MATERIALS?​

In a word: very. For the U.S., Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and other producers of advanced technology and components, access to materials with such properties as high conductivity is crucial: gallium and germanium increasingly are used in advanced semiconductors in place of silicon.

The materials subject to Chinese export controls are among 50 the United States Geologic Survey has designated as “critical minerals” — non-fuel minerals essential to U.S. economic or national security that have supply chains vulnerable to disruption.

Gallium topped that list. It is needed to make the same high-bandwidth memory chips the U.S. wants to avoid allowing China to access for use in artificial intelligence and defense applications. It’s used to make LEDs, lasers and magnets used in many products. Germanium is used for optical fiber and solar panels, among other uses.

A USGS study recently estimated the likely total cost to the U.S. economy from disruptions to supplies of gallium and germanium alone at more than $3 billion. But the situation is complicated. China imposed licensing requirements on exports of both metals in July 2023. It has not exported either to the U.S. this year, according to Chinese customs data. Antimony exports also have plunged.

China produces the lion’s share of most critical minerals, but there are alternatives. Japan also imports nearly all of its gallium, for example, but it also extracts it by recycling scrap metal.

Washington has been moving to tap sources other than China, forming a “Minerals Security Partnership” with the EU and 15 other countries. President Joe Biden’s visit to Africa this week highlighted that effort. Potential supply disruptions also have spurred efforts to tap U.S. deposits of rare earths and other critical materials in southeastern Wyoming, Montana, Nevada, Minnesota and parts of the American Southwest.

Germanium has been extracted from zinc mined in Alaska and Tennessee and the U.S. government has a stockpile. The Department of Defense has a recycling program that can extract scrap germanium from night vision lenses and tank turret windows.

But China’s dominance as a supplier gives it an overwhelming cost advantage, and U.S. resource companies face strong pressures over the potential environmental impact of mines and refineries.

WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN NEXT?​

Since then-President Trump launched a trade war against Beijing that has ramped up over time, China has adopted a relatively constrained and cautious approach in responding to the U.S. limits on access to advanced technology.

Much depends on the future course of overall relations. It is unclear if Trump will follow through on his vows to push tariffs sharply higher once he takes office or if such declarations are the opening gambits in future trade negotiations.

China hit back with its own tariff hikes, but excluded many items crucial for its own economy. It sanctioned certain companies, especially defense contractors doing business with Taiwan, but refrained from outright bans on exports of vital materials to the U.S.

This time may be different.

Just after China’s Commerce Ministry announced its export ban, various Chinese industry associations including automakers and the China Semiconductor Association issued statements denouncing Washington’s moves to curb access to strategically sensitive technologies and declaring that U.S. computer chips are unreliable.

Beijing’s announcement also extends its ban on exporting Chinese-produced gallium and other critical minerals to the U.S. to apply to all countries, entities and individuals, saying violators will “be held accountable according to law.”

https://apnews.com/article/china-us-gallium-critical-tech-ban-711fdfcb7c09e0e0e6374192fd2e24fa
 
LeonardoBjj said:

China’s ban on key high-tech materials could have broad impact on industries, economy​


BY ELAINE KURTENBACH​

Updated 5:23 AM BRT, December 6, 2024

BANGKOK (AP) — China has banned exports of key materials used to make a wide range of products, including smartphones, electric vehicles, radar systems and CT scanners, swiping back at Washington after it expanded export controls to include dozens of Chinese companies that make equipment used to produce advanced computer chips.

Both sides say their controls are justified by national security concerns and both accuse the other of “weaponizing” trade. Analysts say the latest restrictions could have a wide impact on manufacturing in many industries and supply chains.

“Critical mineral security is now intrinsically linked to the escalating tech trade war,” Gracelin Baskaran and Meredith Schwartz of the Center for Strategic International Studies, wrote in a report on Beijing’s decision.

The full impact will depend partly on whether U.S. industries can compensate for any loss of access to the strategically important materials, equipment and components.

Here’s why this could be a tipping point in trade conflict between the two biggest economies, coming at a time when antagonisms already were expected to heat up once President-elect Donald Trump takes office, given his vows to hike tariffs on imports of Chinese-made products.

WHAT DID CHINA DO AND WHY?​

China has banned, in principle, exports to the United States of gallium, germanium and antimony — critical minerals needed to make advanced semiconductors, among many other types of equipment. Beijing also tightened controls on exports of graphite, which is used in EV and grid-storage batteries. China is the largest source for most of these materials and also dominates refining of those materials, which are used both for consumer goods and for military purposes.

The limits announced Tuesday also include exports of super-hard materials, such as diamonds and other synthetic materials that are not compressible and extremely dense. They are used in many industrial areas such as cutting tools, disc brakes and protective coatings.

Next on the list of potential bans, experts say: tungsten, magnesium and aluminum alloys.

WHAT DID THE US DO AND WHY?​

The Chinese Commerce Ministry announced its measures after the U.S. government ordered a slew of new measures meant to prevent sales to China of certain types of advanced semiconductors and the tools and software needed to make them. Washington also expanded its “entity list” of companies facing strict export controls to include 140 more companies, nearly all of them based in China or Chinese-owned.

Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said the revised rules were intended to impair China’s ability to use advanced technologies that “pose a risk to our national security.” The updated regulations also limit exports to China of high-bandwidth memory chips that are needed to process massive amounts of data in advanced applications such as artificial intelligence.

Export licenses will likely be denied for any U.S. company trying to do business with the 140 companies newly added to the “entity list,” as well as the dozens of others already on the list. The aim, officials said, is to stop Chinese companies from leveraging U.S. technology to make their own semiconductors.

The Biden administration has been expanding the number of companies affected by such export controls while encouraging an expansion of investments in and manufacturing of semiconductors in the U.S. and other Western countries.

Washington also extended the restrictions on exports of advanced semiconductor technology to companies in other countries, though it excluded companies in key allies like Japan, South Korea and the Netherlands that are thought to have adequate export controls of their own.

HOW IMPORTANT ARE THOSE MATERIALS?​

In a word: very. For the U.S., Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and other producers of advanced technology and components, access to materials with such properties as high conductivity is crucial: gallium and germanium increasingly are used in advanced semiconductors in place of silicon.

The materials subject to Chinese export controls are among 50 the United States Geologic Survey has designated as “critical minerals” — non-fuel minerals essential to U.S. economic or national security that have supply chains vulnerable to disruption.

Gallium topped that list. It is needed to make the same high-bandwidth memory chips the U.S. wants to avoid allowing China to access for use in artificial intelligence and defense applications. It’s used to make LEDs, lasers and magnets used in many products. Germanium is used for optical fiber and solar panels, among other uses.

A USGS study recently estimated the likely total cost to the U.S. economy from disruptions to supplies of gallium and germanium alone at more than $3 billion. But the situation is complicated. China imposed licensing requirements on exports of both metals in July 2023. It has not exported either to the U.S. this year, according to Chinese customs data. Antimony exports also have plunged.

China produces the lion’s share of most critical minerals, but there are alternatives. Japan also imports nearly all of its gallium, for example, but it also extracts it by recycling scrap metal.

Washington has been moving to tap sources other than China, forming a “Minerals Security Partnership” with the EU and 15 other countries. President Joe Biden’s visit to Africa this week highlighted that effort. Potential supply disruptions also have spurred efforts to tap U.S. deposits of rare earths and other critical materials in southeastern Wyoming, Montana, Nevada, Minnesota and parts of the American Southwest.

Germanium has been extracted from zinc mined in Alaska and Tennessee and the U.S. government has a stockpile. The Department of Defense has a recycling program that can extract scrap germanium from night vision lenses and tank turret windows.

But China’s dominance as a supplier gives it an overwhelming cost advantage, and U.S. resource companies face strong pressures over the potential environmental impact of mines and refineries.

WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN NEXT?​

Since then-President Trump launched a trade war against Beijing that has ramped up over time, China has adopted a relatively constrained and cautious approach in responding to the U.S. limits on access to advanced technology.

Much depends on the future course of overall relations. It is unclear if Trump will follow through on his vows to push tariffs sharply higher once he takes office or if such declarations are the opening gambits in future trade negotiations.

China hit back with its own tariff hikes, but excluded many items crucial for its own economy. It sanctioned certain companies, especially defense contractors doing business with Taiwan, but refrained from outright bans on exports of vital materials to the U.S.

This time may be different.

Just after China’s Commerce Ministry announced its export ban, various Chinese industry associations including automakers and the China Semiconductor Association issued statements denouncing Washington’s moves to curb access to strategically sensitive technologies and declaring that U.S. computer chips are unreliable.

Beijing’s announcement also extends its ban on exporting Chinese-produced gallium and other critical minerals to the U.S. to apply to all countries, entities and individuals, saying violators will “be held accountable according to law.”

https://apnews.com/article/china-us-gallium-critical-tech-ban-711fdfcb7c09e0e0e6374192fd2e24fa
Click to expand...

It's kind of humorous that most of the nations with the largest rare earth mineral reserves are BRICS countries.
 
We got all the rare earth we need in Wyoming , got all the oil we need , we're building pharma factories and plants. We could be totally self reliant n be just fine ......... could have a ton more jobs a far less unemployment issue also. .....



If if if - companies could be less greedy n be happy just being really rich not crazy rich. Pay a liveable wage . However human nature won't ever let that happen :(
 
Streeter said:
We got all the rare earth we need in Wyoming , got all the oil we need , we're building pharma factories and plants. We could be totally self reliant n be just fine ......... could have a ton more jobs a far less unemployment issue also. .....



If if if - companies could be less greedy n be happy just being really rich not crazy rich. Pay a liveable wage . However human nature won't ever let that happen :(
Click to expand...

Lol. If you want to crater the US then yes, we can try to be "totally self-reliant." No country can go it alone, including the US.
 
Sweater of AV said:
Lol. If you want to crater the US then yes, we can try to be "totally self-reliant." No country can go it alone, including the US.
Click to expand...
Lol, how the fuck would being self reliant if needed crater the US? I never said isolate ourselves I said be self reliant which is a GOOD thing.

Would still trade but couldn't be held hostage countries like China for rare earth an pharmaceuticals.

We would still need trade for some thi gs but big stuff like Energy, rare earth (tech), pharmaceutical s. We could be at least mostly as we have it. Again not a bad thing.
 
Streeter said:
I said be self reliant
Click to expand...
Streeter said:
We would still need trade
Click to expand...

So, which of those words do you not know the definition of?

Also, in no way, shape or form can we be completely self-reliant when it comes to natural resources, energy etc. No one in their right mind would make such an asinine claim.
 
DoctorTaco said:
If I buy lemons for 30 dollars, sugar for 20 then I’ve spent 50 dollars. I sell the lemonade and make 100, profiting 50.

If next week I buy lemons for 45 and sugar for 30, I’ve spent 75 dollars. I now I need to make 125 to keep my profits the same, so I raise the prices of lemonade.
Click to expand...
Can you dumb that down for the audience on the right?
 
Sweater of AV said:
Lol. If you want to crater the US then yes, we can try to be "totally self-reliant." No country can go it alone, including the US.
Click to expand...
We probably could go it alone given our agricultural productivity and fossil fuel resources but it'd require Americans accepting a much lower standard of living which is unlikely. If these right wing populists actually got their way and tanked the country on their way to autarky they'd get voted out well before they achieved it because Americans would quickly realize its a terrible idea.
 
Islam Imamate said:
We probably could go it alone given our agricultural productivity and fossil fuel resources but it'd require Americans accepting a much lower standard of living which is unlikely. If these right wing populists actually got their way and tanked the country on their way to autarky they'd get voted out well before they achieved it because Americans would quickly realize its a terrible idea.
Click to expand...
- If they studied the so demonized book's, they would understand what stupid tard-topiua is thinking that a contrie can strive alone. Why would someone do business with US them?

Or last tard, badmounthed China, to get on the good graces of Trump.
 
The South African White House. Elon owns Trump and Peter Thiel owns Vance.
Good to see Elon in France with his sidekick, Trump.
The question is did Elon buy Trump or did Putin give Elon all his dirt on Trump.
Also does Trump hold Melania’s hand while Elon is Trudeauing Melania.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

payton
Economy Trump suggests Canada become 51st state
8 9 10
Replies
194
Views
5K
Xanzito
X
Cajun
Elections Trudeau Visits Trump
3 4 5
Replies
96
Views
3K
Hannibal Lector
H
Scerpi
Economy Biden imposed stiff Tariffs on China.... Like Trump had in place/Is Proposing.... And Kamala is condemning (What?)
Replies
9
Views
543
djacobox372
djacobox372

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,255,283
Messages
56,702,122
Members
175,362
Latest member
Foxbat

Share this page

Back
Top